Text Size

-

+

reset

POLITICO 44

Mitt Romney announced on Fox News this afternoon that he’d be coming to the Silver State — the state whose GOP caucuses loved him most in 2008 — to unveil his jobs plan on Sept. 6, the day after Labor Day.

Romney wasn’t specific about what he’d be unveiling. But he did say “it will be very different from (Obama’s).”

Obama has focused his jobs message — at least the one he brought to Reno this spring — on investment in research and innovation. Romney has focused his on enabling the private sector to innovate by ensuring that taxes on “job makers” — businesses and top earners — stay low.

“President Obama and I could not be more different. He spent his life in politics, I spent my life as a businessperson; I know what it takes to get jobs in this country,” Romney said on the program. “I understand how the economy works, and I want to use that skill to get Americans back to work and to get America, once again, on a ramp to remain as it has always been the most powerful economic engine in the world.”

Romney often refers to his 25 years in the private sector, the bulk of them spent at Bain Capital, a private equity firm based in Boston. He points to his resume as experience that gives him street cred on the economy — and points out that in the entire GOP field, only he and pizza magnate Herman Cain have spent significant parts of their careers in the private sector.

But that background has brought shots from his competitors.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, also a GOP presidential candidate, said on CNN last week that using a private-sector record to run for public office is “oranges and apples ... Running a state is different from running a business.”

For now Romney is focusing his message on Obama — whose jobs plan he admits he doesn’t know, but said today that “if it’s a continuation of what we’ve seen in the past, we know it’ll fail.”

Romney has brought his national jobs message to Nevada before, most memorably in June, when he taped a campaign commercial, “Bump in the Road,” as a response to an Obama speech in which he said there would be “bumps in the road” on the way to economic recovery. The commercial, taped along the Las Vegas Beltway in North Las Vegas, featured locals claiming they were Americans, not bumps in the road.

At this point, Romney has featured Nevada in his campaign more heavily than either Obama or any other GOP candidates; except for Ron Paul, no other front-runner in the Republican field has yet made a trip to the Silver State.

Karoun Demirjian is a reporter for the Las Vegas Sun. The Las Vegas Sun and POLITICO are partnering to cover the 2012 presidential election.

Readers' Comments (39)

How do you like my shinny teeth this morning? They are great aren't they, really, really great. I polished them special this morning so I could better sink my teeth into you! Just, joking, just joking, ha, ha, ...

Well, as you know my new jobs plan is for America to build me a really big home! But the good news is America, you get to build one for each of my boys and each of their children, my sis wants one too, and my brother Scott called an put in his order too! Hold your applause Americans I know you are so thrilled to serve me, my boy's are. Yes, I am destined to become a God, but until then I have to settle for being ruler of America, you'll love me, you really, really will after all I am Mittens!

George Washington and JFK were the other two POTUS that would not take a salary.

+ + +

" The President's failure to put the nation's fiscal and economic house in order has caused a massive loss of confidence that has caused an embarassing downgrade. In the Carter Era, it was called a 'malaise'. Under President Obama it's called MELTDOWN. ", MR

"Mitt Romney" and "Jobs" should not be used in the same sentence after his lousy record of ranking near-last in the nation in job growth as governor and his "private sector experience" of sending American jobs overseas. Rick Perry is the only GOP candidate with any credibility on jobs & economic issues.

Bain Capital is to Businesses as a wrecking yard is to the Auto Industry.

"22 percent of the money Bain Capital raised from 1987 to 1995 was invested in five businesses - Stage Stores, American Pad & Paper, GS Indusries, Dade, and Details. These five made Bain $578 million in profit, even as all five eventually went bankrupt."

It will be interesting to see whether Romney gets more specific or sticks to Obama-style generalities.

So far, Romney's business success hasn't helped him become a political success.

I think Romney's political inexperience makes him a very timid and indecisive politician. He doesn't seem to know how to roll with the punches or how to take advantage of opportunities to advance his career.

For example, his reaction to the events in Libya was the kind of grandstanding that you expect from a freshman member of the U.S. House.

If Romney, like Obama, is listening to business leaders who slop at the trough of taxpayers, he'll have a hard time seizing the initiative on fixing the economy.

Here is the rest of the story you didn't post. Every one of those businesses you claim went bankrupt, are still in business thanks to Bain Capital. Check them out on Google. This idea that some one can go in, rape a company of all assets then make billions in profits is ridiculous. The only way you make money selling a company is to make the business more profitable than it was when initially purchased. That is business 101. Which may be too complicated for morons to understand.

Of course it will be different. It will be based on cutting taxes and deregulating.

We all know the fundamental differences between the Republicans and Democrats.

I really look forward to seeing the plans because the CBO can score them. There is a sweet spot with taxes and I think we were there when GW Bush came into the WH. When they put through those tax cuts, they took things outside of the tolerances. This government must spend money. How much, we can debate, but we know we'll spend money. So just how much can we cut, and when can we cut?

If simply cutting taxes was the answer then cut them to zero. Of course, that is absurd, and exactly why I say it. It's not the end all answer. Government plays a role and it must be paid for.

This is great. Obama does not even own the bully pulpit anymore. His call for more spending and higher taxes (his jobs speech) will be covered widely and countered with Romneys Reagonesque plans for improving the economy. Romney will show America, why everything Obama has done has been the exact opposite of what is needed to get the economy moving. American business is sitting on great piles of cash waiting to find out what Obama's next act to destroy free enterprise is. The economy will start getting better when it becomes more clear that the great destroyer of the free enterprise system is going to be defeated.

Of course it will be different. It will be based on cutting taxes and deregulating.

We all know the fundamental differences between the Republicans and Democrats.

I really look forward to seeing the plans because the CBO can score them. There is a sweet spot with taxes and I think we were there when GW Bush came into the WH. When they put through those tax cuts, they took things outside of the tolerances. This government must spend money. How much, we can debate, but we know we'll spend money. So just how much can we cut, and when can we cut?

If simply cutting taxes was the answer then cut them to zero. Of course, that is absurd, and exactly why I say it. It's not the end all answer. Government plays a role and it must be paid for.

Of course it will be different. It will be based on cutting taxes and deregulating.

We all know the fundamental differences between the Republicans and Democrats.

I really look forward to seeing the plans because the CBO can score them. There is a sweet spot with taxes and I think we were there when GW Bush came into the WH. When they put through those tax cuts, they took things outside of the tolerances. This government must spend money. How much, we can debate, but we know we'll spend money. So just how much can we cut, and when can we cut?

If simply cutting taxes was the answer then cut them to zero. Of course, that is absurd, and exactly why I say it. It's not the end all answer. Government plays a role and it must be paid for.

Lets have a serious discussion about who is best to lead our country, not totally exaggerate. Tax cuts help those most in need by getting them working which in turn brings more money into our government. Its worked over and over. Obama's ideas are the antithesis of good policy. Not a bad guy, just bad policy.

This is great. Obama does not even own the bully pulpit anymore. His call for more spending and higher taxes (his jobs speech) will be covered widely and countered with Romneys Reagonesque plans for improving the economy. Romney will show America, why everything Obama has done has been the exact opposite of what is needed to get the economy moving. American business is sitting on great piles of cash waiting to find out what Obama's next act to destroy free enterprise is. The economy will start getting better when it becomes more clear that the great destroyer of the free enterprise system is going to be defeated.

If you're deluded into believing Romney can set the debate with this stunt, you need to think again. Reagonesque? Hah! That's not exactly praise there. Trickle down economics hurt this country under Reagan and Bush, with a short reprieve under Clinton.

The problems we're experiencing are global too. The idea that Obama is the cause of all of this is simply ridiculous, especially when you look at how it all came to be. He was in the Senate when things started tanking.

The problems we're experiencing are global too. The idea that Obama is the cause of all of this is simply ridiculous, especially when you look at how it all came to be. He was in the Senate when things started tanking

All I am saying is that the national media will pay attention to Romney's plan. Obama can not just demonize Republicans anymore. No doubt we are in a global economy and I did not say that Obama is the sole cause of the problem, but overspending by governments (liberalism) is the major cause whether it be domestic or foreign, D or R. No one is saying have no government, it just needs to be curtailed if we are to get our house in order and have a growing economy. The exact opposite of what the democrat party and Obama in particular are calling for.

There is a sweet spot with taxes and I think we were there when GW Bush came into the WH. When they put through those tax cuts, they took things outside of the tolerances.

With all due respect, you are simply mistaken. Revenues went up after Bush tax cuts--got o www.taxpolicycenter.org and you will see actual statistics from the white house. . Bush's last deficit was 160 billion. The imbalance occurred when the democrats passed the stimulus which raised spending a trillion a year and we have not cut it since. Revenues have declined a bit hence we now have 1.4 trillion deficits as far as the eyes can see. This is all on the democrats spending binge.

Here we go America. Brace yourselves for the schooling B.O. is about to receive from Romney on how to jump start this stale economy. Romney is from outside the beltway folks - HELLO! He has an ingenious business background that this country is starving for. The only one in the entire race besides Cain with a business background. The others are professional politicians. Time to boot them all out and go with a real professional.

Wherever Obama goes or whatever he tries to do, Romney is there first. And Romney's always got a new ad showing the Obama devastation before each Obama visit. Classic!

True. To a degree. That's what he's attempting to do. It looks aggressive, savvy and on point. However, he's about to propose tax cuts when we're already on the left side of the Laffer curve as far as rates go. It will get eaten up by the CBO. Of course, the CBO will be dismissed by Romney's folks, but that's the problem. This is government and not business. If you don't like the answer, you don't get to hire a different consultant.

The other problem is the presumption of nomination will turn primary voters off. It's a double edged sword. There's nothing wrong with unveiling a plan. Romney's problem is he's measuring the drapes already and many in the party are still looking for an alternative. He'll go into the general with a very low rate of voter conviction. They are going to feel they settled. He'll get killed by apathy.